HRWiki Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 31-40
This is an archive. Please do not add discussion here. Click here to go back to the main FAS historical page.
Redirects
This is a placeholder topic for 5-year redirects. Due to overall decreased activity, FAs are now being reused more often. The common practice has become to redirect to the FA exactly 5 years prior to the current FA. When an article is re-used, mark it in the following manner:
{{FA queue|<date>|Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=<article name>}}
Example:
{{FA queue|15 Aug 2011 |Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=1-Up}}
Please keep this discussion in the FA page at all times, but do copy it to archive pages as well.
cliffhangers
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 31 (Jul 30–Aug 5)
We've featured the second and third parts of the Lappy-napped trilogy, so how about featuring the first? RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 12:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll unstall this too and give it a vote of approval as well for the ending of this sbemail. — Ngamer01 15:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Well jakeula, let's feature this and then go get those hushpuppies! — Defender1031*Talk 16:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I support this, but I don't support featuring these out of order. this one should be featured first, then Lappynapped!, then retirement. but i guess there's not much we can do about that now. i guess Dangeresque 2 was technically released to the public before Dangeresque 1 was, so going out of order wouldn't be unprecedented. But really, i'd like to see this featured in a self-demonstrating matter. And it would be more effective if this one was the first one featured. 
The Knight[/wiki/Special:Contributions/The_Knights_Who_Say_Ni s Who] Say Ni 
19:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I think the other two have ALREADY been featured, sadly. — Defender1031*Talk 22:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
RickTommy made that clear in the original suggestion to feature this article. what is in silver is not important in regard to the given circumstances. The Knight[/wiki/Special:Contributions/The_Knights_Who_Say_Ni s Who] Say Ni 03:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Population: Tire
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 32 (Aug 6–12)
It's been quite some time since we've done a game. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think there's enough content to feature. — Defender1031*Talk 15:36, 23 May 2012 (UTC) Not so. I mean, there is so. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC) After I fixed up some grammar and awkward wording, and added Phlip's Homebrew version of the game being featured, it seems you may be right. — Defender1031*Talk 16:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC) Good enough to feature now. I add my support to this.. — Ngamer01 20:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Not the 100th Email
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 33 (Aug 13–19)
Original title: Not the 100th Email, Sbemail 150?!?, or Page Load Error
As teasers to milestone e-mails, I believe that one of them should be featured. [/wiki/Special:Contributions/124.181.68.22 124.181.68.22] 13:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I'd say Not the 100th Email. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 07:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC) Start with the first one, makes sense. Although it is very short. --[/wiki/Special:Contributions/93.207.87.212 93.207.87.212] 08:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC) (That Anonny Guy) Anon makes a good point. Not the 100th Email is rather short. Would we be able to expand that enough to make a quality write-up? DENNIST/[/wiki/Special:Contributions/DENNIS C] 08:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC) I've drafted a quality write-up: HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Drafts#Not the 100th Email. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 06:46, 22 January 2012 (UTC) THe proposed write up is far too flowery and just makes me go "uch". No. — Defender1031*Talk 00:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC) I've trimmed it down a bit. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC) I didn't say it was too long. I said it was flowery and made me go "uch". The stuff you removed were among the less objectionable parts of it in my opinion. — Defender1031*Talk 15:36, 23 May 2012 (UTC) I've revised it. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC) New version looks good. I'll give this my approval. — Defender1031*Talk 16:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC) I approve as well. It'll make a good feature. — Ngamer01 20:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Career Day
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 35 (Aug 27–Sep 2)
It's the only big toon (apart from the 2-Part Episodes) that hasn't been featured yet. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:58, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I'll go along with this. I enjoyed the art style for SB's educational short and the ending is funny. — Ngamer01 15:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC) Gives us a better look into strong bad's made-uppy space program. Let's feature in T-minus the heck outta dodge! — Defender1031*Talk 16:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The Virus
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 38 (Sep 17–23)
The Virus! The Virus! --[/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 
] Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 14:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
This article might need a bit more expansion before getting featured. doctorwho295 00:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmmmmm...You are correctly correct...maybe. --[/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gfdgsgxgzgdrc ] Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 01:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I think that draft is adequate. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 10:44, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I'd add a bit more information before I think it's ready for primetime, but i think it's on the right track. I'll support this and add to the draft a bit later. — Defender1031*Talk 11:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
There. I modified the draft. I think she's a lookin pretty good there, strang bad! — Defender1031*Talk 11:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Supporting. It looks like a winner to me. — Ngamer01 18:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Coach Z's Problems
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 40 (Oct 1–7)
It's the last of the three really great lists on this wiki about fundamental portions of a character's personality that hasn't yet been featured (the other two being Bubs's Shady Business Practices and Crimes Committed by Strong Bad). I really like this trio of lists because the fundamental personality can be itemized into categories, and the pages elucidate each instance of each category. — Defender1031*Talk 17:50, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Draft looks fine to me. I support it. — Ngamer01 18:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Wow. I can't believe that an article I created has been nominated for featuring. For this reason, I support it, too. RickTommy [/wiki/Special:Contributions/RickTommy (edits)] 13:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC) RickTommy, for the last time, do not put things in the cue or create featured articles less than a week beforehand. Oh, and just to be clear, I was the one who cleaned up the section on the original article and made the content what it is today after extensively detailing the changes on the talk page and it's an accomplishment that I'm rather proud of as well. You, on the other hand, simply copied it from the original page onto a new page without even discussing it first and simply got lucky after the fact that the rest of us agreed that it happened to be a good move. I don't appreciate you claiming credit for my work, thanks very much. — Defender1031*Talk 17:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
